Eunus is a Myth? Part I

[Kishkumen]

In the latter half of the second century, Rome was forced to face the threat of a slave rebellion on the island of Sicily. Allegedly, a man named Eunus, a slave from Apamea, Syria, led a rebellion of thousands of slaves that succeeded in defeating Roman armies several times before M. Peperna defeated him in 132 BCE. Chased down to a cave, the miracle-working slave turned King Antiochus was captured with his personal attendants, who included a barber and a cook. The story is incredible. The questions are: Did this ever happen? Was the story embellished? Was it made up out of whole cloth?

First we have a problem with the sources. There are only two ancient sources. First, Diodorus Siculus (fr. 2 of Book 34) cites the account of Poseidonius. Poseidonius was born three years before the events and could never have seen them. It is not clear who his source(s) was. Diodorus quotes Poseidonius as his sole source for his account, and his account was written almost a century after Eunus. The second account is provided by Florus (2.7.1-8), who was the epitomater of Livy. We cannot be certain that Livy was not relying on Poseidonius too, or a Roman source who was relying on Poseidonius. Some suggest that Livy relied on Polybius, but we cannot be certain.

Scholars point to the physical evidence of Sicilian coins minted by a King Antiochus. Unfortunately, it is impossible to tell whether this Antiochus is Eunus, or perhaps some other Antiochus. The next rebel slave to rise up on Sicily, a man named Athenio, also allegedly played king. It may also be that Poseidonius’ account conflates two figures: one a pretender king named Antiochus, and one a charlatan slave.There are a number of possibilities.

Despite these problems most ancient historians treat Eunus as a real historical figure, despite the fact that his story is incredible. Eunus is depicted as being a kind of religious charlatan. He has waking and sleeping visions of the Syrian goddess Atargatis. He is a diviner. He blows fire out of his mouth, but the sources explain that this was a kind of party trick. Florus writes that Eunus was a fire eater. Lacking agreement on the fine details between the two sources, it is clear there are problems with the evidence.

So, are ancient historians wrong to treat Eunus as a real person? Is Eunus a myth?

[Everybody Wang Chung]

So, are ancient historians wrong to treat Eunus as a real person? Is Eunus a myth?

This sounds like job for Kyler.

[Res Ipsa]

It’s a myth. Barbers aren’t real.

[drumdude]

So, are ancient historians wrong to treat Eunus as a real person? Is Eunus a myth?

This sounds like job for Kyler.

I wouldn't know what to believe without a thorough Kylesian analysis.

[huckelberry]

Is this a question similar to could Spartacus be that mythic character I saw in a movie and be a real person as well?

I recently saw a documentary reminding me of a very very very faint memory that the movie was a big help in ending the black list (among its other virtues)

[Philo Sofee]

It's a myth, no one would name their kid Eunus...

[sock puppet]

In the latter half of the second century, Rome was forced to face the threat of a slave rebellion on the island of Sicily. Allegedly, a man named Eunus, a slave from Apamea, Syria, led a rebellion of thousands of slaves that succeeded in defeating Roman armies several times before M. Peperna defeated him in 132 BCE. Chased down to a cave, the miracle-working slave turned King Antiochus was captured with his personal attendants, who included a barber and a cook. The story is incredible. The questions are: Did this ever happen? Was the story embellished? Was it made up out of whole cloth?

First we have a problem with the sources. There are only two ancient sources. First, Diodorus Siculus (fr. 2 of Book 34) cites the account of Poseidonius. Poseidonius was born three years before the events and could never have seen them. It is not clear who his source(s) was. Diodorus quotes Poseidonius as his sole source for his account, and his account was written almost a century after Eunus. The second account is provided by Florus (2.7.1-8), who was the epitomater of Livy. We cannot be certain that Livy was not relying on Poseidonius too, or a Roman source who was relying on Poseidonius. Some suggest that Livy relied on Polybius, but we cannot be certain.

Scholars point to the physical evidence of Sicilian coins minted by a King Antiochus. Unfortunately, it is impossible to tell whether this Antiochus is Eunus, or perhaps some other Antiochus. The next rebel slave to rise up on Sicily, a man named Athenio, also allegedly played king. It may also be that Poseidonius’ account conflates two figures: one a pretender king named Antiochus, and one a charlatan slave.There are a number of possibilities.

Despite these problems most ancient historians treat Eunus as a real historical figure, despite the fact that his story is incredible. Eunus is depicted as being a kind of religious charlatan. He has waking and sleeping visions of the Syrian goddess Atargatis. He is a diviner. He blows fire out of his mouth, but the sources explain that this was a kind of party trick. Florus writes that Eunus was a fire eater. Lacking agreement on the fine details between the two sources, it is clear there are problems with the evidence.

So, are ancient historians wrong to treat Eunus as a real person? Is Eunus a myth?

Did Eunus, real person or myth, change the course of Roman history?

[Res Ipsa]

I see no reason quibble with the consensus view of the qualified historians.

[Analytics]

Channeling Richard Carrier, did a cult with a record of destroying and altering historical documents, with an agenda to promote its own version of the life of Eunus, take over the world?

[dastardly stem]

In the latter half of the second century, Rome was forced to face the threat of a slave rebellion on the island of Sicily. Allegedly, a man named Eunus, a slave from Apamea, Syria, led a rebellion of thousands of slaves that succeeded in defeating Roman armies several times before M. Peperna defeated him in 132 BCE. Chased down to a cave, the miracle-working slave turned King Antiochus was captured with his personal attendants, who included a barber and a cook. The story is incredible. The questions are: Did this ever happen? Was the story embellished? Was it made up out of whole cloth?

First we have a problem with the sources. There are only two ancient sources. First, Diodorus Siculus (fr. 2 of Book 34) cites the account of Poseidonius. Poseidonius was born three years before the events and could never have seen them. It is not clear who his source(s) was. Diodorus quotes Poseidonius as his sole source for his account, and his account was written almost a century after Eunus. The second account is provided by Florus (2.7.1-8), who was the epitomater of Livy. We cannot be certain that Livy was not relying on Poseidonius too, or a Roman source who was relying on Poseidonius. Some suggest that Livy relied on Polybius, but we cannot be certain.

Scholars point to the physical evidence of Sicilian coins minted by a King Antiochus. Unfortunately, it is impossible to tell whether this Antiochus is Eunus, or perhaps some other Antiochus. The next rebel slave to rise up on Sicily, a man named Athenio, also allegedly played king. It may also be that Poseidonius’ account conflates two figures: one a pretender king named Antiochus, and one a charlatan slave.There are a number of possibilities.

Despite these problems most ancient historians treat Eunus as a real historical figure, despite the fact that his story is incredible. Eunus is depicted as being a kind of religious charlatan. He has waking and sleeping visions of the Syrian goddess Atargatis. He is a diviner. He blows fire out of his mouth, but the sources explain that this was a kind of party trick. Florus writes that Eunus was a fire eater. Lacking agreement on the fine details between the two sources, it is clear there are problems with the evidence.

So, are ancient historians wrong to treat Eunus as a real person? Is Eunus a myth?

Need more information.

Given the above, though, we can ask:

Is it more probable that Eunus is a myth

or

Is it more probable he's a myth and a real person?

As to your question, ancient historians can decide based on the evidence, I'd suggest.